You must log in or # to comment.
Broooo, the CCP is merely adding capitalist modes of production alongside socialist ones! The CCP only needs billionaires in the party to compete in the world as it is, bro! Bro, it’s not CCP labor exploitation if we’re letting foreign corporations do it! Actually, it’s the foreign corpos doing slave labor in Xinjiang, we’re just trying to educate them about how much they love it here, bro! Bro, it’s socialism when the government owns the means of production, because the state says it’s for the workers! Bro, how can you call it genocide when whataboutism??? Also bro, something something Russia for some reason DECADES after they stopped pretending to be communist. North Korea landed on the sun, bro.
You missed “haha if I call it ‘tinyman square’ surely I’m convincing everyone that no massacre happened there even though the CCP itself is starting to reverse course on that”
I don’t understand why they feel the need to glaze that government so hard. They could just point out the 1985 MOVE bombing or so to relativize it out something.
They just want actual communism and can’t accept that it’s impossible because of human nature
What are you smoking?
- you don’t need to glaze the CCP if you want communism
- why the hell would you assume that hUmAn nAtUrE is somehow incompatible with one of the ways humans have lived together for thousands of years?
Read “dawn of everything”. Having a global near-monopoly of societal organization is a very new phenomenon.
Real talk! I got appropriate respect for the .ml & hexbear communities, but the lengths they jump through to appease Vlad and Xi are a little much. (Obligatory, my country’s leader isn’t great either. So I guess my point is moot.)
Your point isn’t moot, multiple countries are allowed to have terrible leaders and it’s a bit silly that we’re not allowed to have an opinion on international politics if our home country isn’t a paragon of ethics (none of them are)
How fucking hard can it be to stand up to peoples rights and stand up against authoritarianism? Why do most of these people think that just because a dictator calls something socialist or communist it actually becomes socialist and communist? Neither Russia or China are democratic or socialist. Also not even close to communist.
They just keep on justifying horrible leaders because they are against "the west’.
deleted by creator
No, it’s not.
The easiest way to prove this would be to go and speak to a Uyghur. Everyone I’ve ever spoken with has confirmed what is happening to their families back home.
This is a “vocational centre”, pretty nice looking school isn’t it? Very generous of China to offer such friendly reeducation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iyFw8UF85A
That’s Carl Sagan describing healthy skepticism.
How do you know that image is what you claim it is?
Do you know the location of the image?
Do you know the photographer?
Do you know when the image was taken?
Do you have any evidence of what that is even an image of?Perimeter fence of a vocational centre in Dabancheng, Xinjiang. Photo by Thomas Peter on September 4th, 2018.
Tankie fuck probably thinks the Earth is flat because ‘muh healthy skepticism can’t trust evidence’.
They would deny the earth was round if the United States said it was.
Oh boy here it is
deleted by creator
Wikipedia is a wonderful online encyclopedia. It’s not a source and they don’t claim to be a source. It’s a starting point for people who want to learn about a topic, it’s not evidence of anything.
If you actually go to the sources section of that link you’ll see they’re all secondary sources. For some reason, nobody can get reliable evidence on what is supposedly one of the biggest human rights violations in history.
The excuse is always that China is so secretive and tightly managed that it’s impossible to smuggle actual evidence out of the country. The best we can do is an endless stream of anonymous and semi-anonymous sources that keep changing their story.
Thanks for explaining how an encyclopedia works, I guess.
Of course an encyclopedia is going to cite mostly secondary sources, especially when covering a matter that cannot be proven based on a single account or piece of evidence. That’s not some kind of gotcha.
Personally I trust Wikipedia enough to assume they’ll cite mostly reliable secondary sources that are based on a significant amount of credible witness accounts and evidence (aka primary sources). Of course a bit of healthy skepticism is a good thing, so if you’d like to take a closer look at Wikipedia’s sources and what their claims are based on, more power to you!
I’m curious, how many of the 403 sources cited by Wikipedia did you look at before deciding none of them are based on credible primary sources?
I’m curious, how many of the 403 sources cited by Wikipedia did you look at before deciding none of them are based on credible primary sources?
That’s the neat part. They don’t! Why bother checking things when you can dismiss reality!
There isn’t enough time in universe to attempt constructive engagement with every genocide denialist out there. If you have access to all the same data and come with an angle “uyghur genocide is CIA story”, there’s nothing to engage with.
I’d have better luck teaching a pig calculus.
Removed by mod
You sound just like a Holocaust denialist btw
“I’m just asking questions, why are people not wanting to answer my questions? I’m just asking questions”
You’ll never get that.
The “point of view” is based entirely off unverifiable claims.At best, you’ll get a wall of “articles” that only reference each other in a giant attribution circle. They’ll downvote you and call you a tankie all day long but they’ll never show you real evidence.
And where did you hear they were ok? Denial of genocide takes but a little propaganda and a lot of other squashing of news. It’d be a shame if china was an expert at that.
